VIA Rail

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

I can only see the need for an additional rail station between Kitchener and London in New Hamburg (pop. 13,000) and with only three intermediary stops, I don't see the point of operating GO trains on this 94 km long segment. I would therefore let GO operate Toronto-Kitchener and Toronto-Aldershot-Brantford-London and operate VIA as Express Windsor/Sarnia-London-Kitchener-Toronto, which only stop at major stations east of Kitchener, but ensure a basic service for intermediary stops west of Kitchener...

Thank you.

Pretty much what I imagine. I would add GO adding buses operating out of London as necessary.

I get the need for London to have better connections to Toronto. But VIA can deliver that in the same way that HFR will do this for Peterborough. There's really no need for a suburban rail service to be running 200 km long routes. It also speaks to the bizarre fixation on London as just an exurb of Toronto, that completely ignores its importance as the regional centre for Southwestern Ontario.

[Truenorth00]

...The exploratory work will include VIA Rail and the Canada Infrastructure Bank through the High Frequency Rail Joint Project Office.

...

The federal transport minister pushed back on suggestions that the new commitment to improve passenger rail is just a political promise as rumours swirl about a possible fall election.

“This is not talking, this is governing in action,” he said. “I look forward to completing this phase and moving to the next phase as quickly as possible.”

The Toronto-Windsor-Sarnia corridor is VIA Rail’s second busiest route in the country.

https://london.ctvnews.ca/rail-announcem...-of-federal-commitment-lacking-1.5517688

Make of that what you will. It's always been obvious to me that Toronto-London-Windsor was next. But of course, that would be a more complicated project than HFR East.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by jamincan

Siri, when is the next election?

In similarly pointless news, the government managed to twist a routine bridge replacement into the umpteenth pre-election announcement that they are moving ahead with the future Hwy 7 between Kitchener and Guelph. They have been playing the same trick for the last 50 years, and will milk that project for every vote they can before they cancel it for good.

Anyone hoping Metrolinx will expand it's purview to include interregional transit outside the GTA is going to be sorely disappointed. As far as Metrolinx is concerned, there are two types of people - those travelling into Toronto during the week, and those travelling out of Toronto on the weekend.

yeah it is insanely aggravating when they try to act like they are doing something instead of actually doing something. electioneering. I put zero stock into any infrastructure promises made prior to an election. I am a huge environmentalist, but if I see another "environmental consultation" for HSR service in the corridor (which has been announced/cancelled and re-announced/cancelled since the 1980s and maybe even earlier), I will barf. Also anytime I see "exploratory"

[ssiguy]

If GO reaches London, I don't ML will have anything to do with it but strictly a matter between QP & London.

ML's mandate is to coordinate transit in the GTA/Golden Horseshoe and London definately is not in that region. I don't London would accept a Toronto based agency dictating the transportation needs and policies of London or other areas of SWO.

[Urban_Sky]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

If GO reaches London, I don't ML will have anything to do with it but strictly a matter between QP & London.

ML's mandate is to coordinate transit in the GTA/Golden Horseshoe and London definately is not in that region. I don't London would accept a Toronto based agency dictating the transportation needs and policies of London or other areas of SWO.

Can I buy a verb for these two sentence fragments?

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

If GO reaches London, I don't ML will have anything to do with it but strictly a matter between QP & London.

ML's mandate is to coordinate transit in the GTA/Golden Horseshoe and London definately is not in that region. I don't London would accept a Toronto based agency dictating the transportation needs and policies of London or other areas of SWO.

My assumption is that where GO touches, it would be under Metrolinx. That does not mean that LT falls under Metrolinx or even that the stations are under Metrolinx. The money to pay for the train would be the part under Metrolinx.

[GreatTallNorth2]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

My assumption is that where GO touches, it would be under Metrolinx. That does not mean that LT falls under Metrolinx or even that the stations are under Metrolinx. The money to pay for the train would be the part under Metrolinx.

GO was testing trains in London yesterday.

https://london.ctvnews.ca/go-transit-train-spotted-in-downtown-london-ont-saturday-1.5530701

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by GreatTallNorth2

GO was testing trains in London yesterday.

https://london.ctvnews.ca/go-transit-train-spotted-in-downtown-london-ont-saturday-1.5530701

Interesting to see an older engine with 6 coaches.

[ShavedParmesanCheese]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

My assumption is that where GO touches, it would be under Metrolinx. That does not mean that LT falls under Metrolinx or even that the stations are under Metrolinx. The money to pay for the train would be the part under Metrolinx.

Look at how Metrolinx operates in Hamilton - they own and operate their own stations, which the HSR can integrate with if they want to, but aren't required to.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by ShavedParmesanCheese

Look at how Metrolinx operates in Hamilton - they own and operate their own stations, which the HSR can integrate with if they want to, but aren't required to.

Isn't Metrolinx building several LRT systems? Maybe Hamilton could have one built if they did.

[Floppa]

I'll start taking bets on which gets finished first: VIA HFR or the SC Maglev

[Floppa]

How come VIA can't share the Mont Royal tunnel with REM? Subways and commuter rail in Tokyo share tracks.

I think Canada needs a Marshall Plan. Maybe that will happen after WWIII with China.

[Floppa]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

If GO reaches London, I don't ML will have anything to do with it but strictly a matter between QP & London.

ML's mandate is to coordinate transit in the GTA/Golden Horseshoe and London definately is not in that region. I don't London would accept a Toronto based agency dictating the transportation needs and policies of London or other areas of SWO.

Perhaps GO will end up being something like NJ Transit. London is the Hoboken of Ontario.

At the end of the day, do you really care if your burger is delivered by Uber or Doordash? No. You just want a fast, reliable and affordable service. So whether that's VIA or GO doesn't really matter. All I care about is having improved rail service and ending domestic flights in the Corridor.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Floppa

How come VIA can't share the Mont Royal tunnel with REM? IIRC, subways and commuter rail in Tokyo share tracks.

The commuter lines that through-run on the metro and subway in Tokyo use rolling stock that's very similar to the metro stock including the same electrification and platform heights, generally stopping at the metro stations providing the same service just by a different operator so it doesn't really reduce service levels. They also operate in a similar way using the same compatible signaling systems. In other words, the commuter rail lines are basically the same as an extension of the subway/metro but operated by different entities. In the case of REM, it is fully automated and VIA rail won't likely have any level of automation as most mainline rail doesn't. They'll likely be electrified at 25 kv AC which is the most common type for long distance lines while the REM is at 1.5kv DC. Yes VIA could have bi-modal trains but that would add extra cost and complexity for the sake of a very short stretch. Although the best option would likely be for VIA to have batteries to allow for short un-wired operation.

But the biggest issue is that REM will be running too frequently to allow any slots to be used be other services. It's expected that the core section including the tunnel will carry 30 trains per hour at peak, or 10 for each of the three northwestern branches allowing service every 6 minutes for each. Mainline rail trains just aren't compatible with that frequency since there needs to be much more space between trains.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Floppa

How come VIA can't share the Mont Royal tunnel with REM? Subways and commuter rail in Tokyo share tracks.

I think Canada needs a Marshall Plan. Maybe that will happen after WWIII with China.

You think China will help us rebuild?

[Rico Rommheim]

The idea of building a new tunnel under the mountain is finally gaining steam after people are finally realizing that there's no other alternative. Yes it'll cost money, but are we really that much of a third rate country that we can't build tunnels anymore? WWIII with China or not, It's only a matter of time now.

[Floppa]

Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim

The idea of building a new tunnel under the mountain is finally gaining steam after people are finally realizing that there's no other alternative. Yes it'll cost money, but are we really that much of a third rate country that we can't build tunnels anymore? WWIII with China or not, It's only a matter of time now.

This country is a joke. Whether it's Indiginous reconcilliation, addressing systemic racism, dealing with anti-vaxxer Russian trolls or building any kind of infrastructure we're really not much better than the most backwater Republican state.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Floppa

This country is a joke. Whether it's Indiginous reconcilliation, addressing systemic racism, dealing with anti-vaxxer Russian trolls or building any kind of infrastructure we're really not much better than the most backwater Republican state.

I think we’re bad at certain types of infrastructure, but I don’t think there is a general problem. Water infrastructure is good, electrical is good, local roads are good, community facilities like libraries and sports facilities are good. We’re not good at vanity projects, but if you look at what happens in countries that prioritize vanity projects over basic infrastructure I am not sure that is a bad thing.

[GoTrans]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I think we’re bad at certain types of infrastructure, but I don’t think there is a general problem. Water infrastructure is good, electrical is good, local roads are good, community facilities like libraries and sports facilities are good. We’re not good at vanity projects, but if you look at what happens in countries that prioritize vanity projects over basic infrastructure I am not sure that is a bad thing.

Water infrastructure is good only in the southern Canada, it is not good in the hundreds of native communities. Transit is only beginning to get to pass the adequate to the good level in most large urban centres. Roads are good to the detriment of few if any improvements to rail service, freight or passenger. My question is that do you consider rail and transit improvements vanity projects? Please define vanity projects.

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by Floppa

This country is a joke. Whether it's Indiginous reconcilliation, addressing systemic racism, dealing with anti-vaxxer Russian trolls or building any kind of infrastructure we're really not much better than the most backwater Republican state.

This is literally one of the world's most multicultural countries, not some homogeneous ethno-state. Walk through the streets of Toronto, Montreal or Vancouver and see that despite having people from around the world, Canada is a remarkably conflict free and happy place.

We're also at 71%/61% 1st/fully vaccinated, one of the best in the developed world.

Our infrastructure isn't perfect, but it works pretty well for such a large and low-density country. We've built lots (railways/hydro plants/highways) and have a decent social infrastructure too.

Fair point about our Indigenous relationship, but we're slowly (too slowly IMO) moving the right way there too.

"Backwater Republican state" as if Canada's a modern version of 1950s Alabama? Hyperbole much? For a country that regularly places top-10 in the world for best to live in/best outcomes?

No, we're not perfect. We have flaws and warts. Sometimes bureaucratic stupidity gets in the way. I hardly think one tunnel's issues make Canada into some sort of cesspool.

Get a grip.